I will split my time with my colleague because I have one particular question.
I would like to go back to the issue of grievances.
My understanding is that grievances and whistleblower complaints are handled differently.
Please explain what would happen in the following scenario. Let's say that an employer decides to transfer a whistleblower to another location—this is easier to do in certain departments—and there are suspicions that this is a way to punish the employee. For example, say that the employee worked in Montreal and he or she was transferred to the Northwest Territories without a reason being given. In terms of the union or labour standards, this may not seem unreasonable. However, experience clearly shows, or at least gives cause to believe, that this is a way to punish a whistleblower. In this case, there would be no grounds for a grievance and you would not be able to intervene. It could not be proven that the transfer was a punishment; it might even seem like a promotion.
What would be your position in such a situation? Could you look into this case on the basis that a disclosure was made that warranted examination?